Saturday, November 19, 2016

Photo from the Los Angeles Times Essential PoliticsPost Election Symposium

By Leadfoot

Last night, Bella and I had the privilege
(see what I did there?) of attending the Los Angeles Times Essential PoliticsPost Election Symposium. I got an email inviting all subscribers to attend, and
immediately ordered tickets. It was good I acted quickly, because the event was
sold out within 5 minutes. Apparently we all need post election therapy here in
L.A.

So I busted Bella out of school early, and
we drove downtown. She missed last period, which is social studies. I figured
this event would be more educational anyway.

First up was Jill
Darling, survey director of theCenter for Economic
and Social Research at
the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. That is a very long
title that just means she conducted the poll that the LA Times printed before
the election – the only major newspaper poll that predicted a Trump win.

Since theUSC Dornsife/Los
Angeles Times Presidential Election Daybreak Polldebuted in July, people on social media had asked “what is up
with that LA Times poll though?” because it predicted Trump
winning the election by 3 points. It was so different from the other polls,
that observers thought the LA Times had to be wrong. Now the pollsters look
like geniuses. So how did they do it? Darling said they “caught the wave of
secret Trump voters” by not using the telephone. They went into communities in
the swing states and set up panels, which they used to get to know people. They
formed relationships and built trust, meeting face to face with the same people
each week. While respondents might lie to a faceless pollster on the phone,
they tell the truth to someone they know and trust.

Darling was asked why the rest of us were
so duped. She responded that “people were looking at predictor models, not
scientifically sound poll results.” Everyone was looking at sites such as the
New York Times and Nate Silver’s fivethirtyeight.com, which told us the
percentage chance that Hillary would win, so we felt confident. For example,
Nate Silver showed Trump had a 30% chance of winning, so we all thought that
meant he would lose. But if someone told us we had a 30% chance of having a
major earthquake, we would take that much more seriously. That still means that
3 times out of 10, there is a path to victory (or your house falling down). The
lesson is – do not rely so heavily on the predictor model.

Next up was a panel of political
strategists, including:

nBill Burton, deputy White House Press Secretary during President
Obama’s first term

nSean Clegg, former deputy mayor of LA, and consultant for Senator-elect Kamala Harris

nMickey Kantor, a former
Commerce secretary under President Bill Clinton

nRob Stutzman, who used to
work in former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration, on the Romney campaign, and was a loud voice in the Never Trump
movement

First, they were asked why everyone in the
world of politics and the media predicted the outcome so incorrectly.

Tim Clark said that “people started to
believe the media line that Trump didn’t have a ground game. We knew we were
going to win. We knew we had North Carolina and Florida won. Our campaign was
built on metrics, data and a strong ground game. The press corps and the
Clinton campaign began to believe the media hype.” The Trump campaign decided
to just keep quiet and not tip their hand.

Protests in Los Angeles against Donald Trump

Next they were asked if a different
Democratic candidate would have changed the outcome.

Bill Burton responded, “There was a lot of
anger out there. I don’t know that some other candidate could have won this
race on the democratic side. Trump just did too good of a job appealing to the
angry white people without college degrees in the rust belt. The Dems needed
more white people (to vote) and I don’t think any candidate would have
attracted them.”

Other panelists noted that “Make America
Great Again” was an economic message, and “Stronger Together” was not.
Americans wanted an economic message during this election cycle. Instead, the
Clinton team made their campaign about Trump -- his failures as a human, and as
a candidate. They needed to focus much more on how to improve the lives of
people feeling economic pain. “We need an economic message that appeals to
people who make between $50,000 and $100,000 a year. We completely missed that
group of voters,” said Mickey Kantor.

Loretta Gonzalez from the AFL-CIO chimed in
to note, “We overlooked why Bernie appealed to people in the Rust Belt. He had
a great message on trade and unions that appealed to those in the blue collar
labor force. The DNC cast his messages aside, and that was a mistake.

The Sanders movement was real! Those were
passionate supporters. In retrospect, Hillary should have made him the VP
candidate. And his message must not be ignored going forward. The youth has a
very strong BS meter and they didn’t trust Hillary. They thought Democrats
should never support trade agreements that don’t protect the workers.”

Kantor agreed and said that “Michael
Dukakis carried Iowa by 12 points in 1988 and Hillary lost it! She just did not
appeal to rural communities at all.” The
Clinton campaign spent more money in OH and PA than any presidential candidate
in history. It simply didn’t matter. The message was wrong.

Trump spent far less money than any candidate
in recent history, and that fact appealed to his base. He was the first truly
independent candidate to ever win the presidency.

That said, if you look at the Senate
candidates’ vote counts, people who voted for the GOP Senate candidates
outweighed those who voted for Trump in FL, NC and OH. So the Republican voters
weren’t entirely buying what Trump was selling. Many didn’t vote for him, but
did vote for Portman, Rubio, etc. He is still the least popular candidate to
ever win the presidency.

Photo from the Los Angeles Times Essential PoliticsPost Election Symposium

Clark implored the audience to understand
that “We need true leadership – someone who talks to the American people in
plain language and walks them through the plans in a way they can understand.
They need to hear specifically how we are going to improve education, and how
we are going to create jobs.” The crowd grew restless and it was clear that
most disagreed that Trump had walked them through anything specific. But the
point was taken that Hillary’s message went over most voters’ heads.

Rob Stutsman did not vote for Trump because
he “had grave concerns about a campaign that was run on denigrating women,
minorities and the disabled.”

When asked if Trump will abandon the
inflammatory rhetoric of the campaign once in office, even the two Republicans on
the panel admitted that “Steve Bannon and Jeff Sessions are a bad sign.” Kantor
said “Bannon is not a person who is worthy of working in the West Wing.”

Kantor also said that Trump gave so many
mixed messages that nobody has any idea what is actually going to happen. “Buy
your popcorn and get in the seats, because this is going to be a wild show!”

At one point Clark said that when his wife
gets together with her “lady friends” -- and all the women in the room started
booing, and he didn’t even get to finish the sentence. Apparently misogyny is
contagious among GOP officials.

Once he was allowed to speak again, Clark
said the GOP was united, and is always united. They get together to support
their candidate. He doesn’t know which way the Dems will go moving forward.
“Will the Progressives or the Centrists lead the party in the next 4 years? And
how do they get them all to come together and support the same candidate?” he
asked. It was a rhetorical question, or at least one that nobody had the answer
to, so we moved on.

Finally, the panel discussed California.
One strategist said that “California is now the center of the Progressive
universe. We have a unified Progressive government that is committed to
protecting Californians from anything Trump might do.”

The issue is that our values here in
California are at odds with fiscal responsibility. For example, we support
immigrant rights, but that position is very expensive to us. We have to come to
terms with that reality at some point. “That’s one of the reasons we put
marijuana on the ballot. We want those tax dollars!” exclaimed Gonzales.

Photo from the Los Angeles Times Essential PoliticsPost Election Symposium

The strategist panel was excused and the
mayoral panel was brought out. Eric Garcetti, the mayor of Los Angeles, kind of
made me fall in love with him. He spoke with enthusiasm and passion (after just
getting off a 16-hour flight from Qatar, where he was discussing the city’s
Olympic bid), had on a very hip suit and shoes, and his answers were inspiring!
He’s pretty easy on the eyes too. Remember his name. He has a future in the
Democratic party! The other mayor was Kevin Faulconer, mayor of San Diego, who is a Republican.

The first question was about Trump’s
promise to cut off funding to sanctuary cities.

Mayor Garcetti responded, “The LAPD’s job
is to keep citizens safe and to solve crimes. We are going to focus on that
great responsibility. We cannot solve murders and rapes and other serious
crimes if we are enforcing immigration law. We are not a city that will ever
stop people and ask them to show us their papers. It’s just not ever going to
happen here.”

Mayor Faulconer answered, “In San Diego, we are building
bridges with Mexico, not walls. Literally. We just opened a pedestrian bridge
that crosses the border. We already have a fence in San Diego, we don’t need a
wall. We aren’t focusing on any of that. We are focusing on how to build a
mutually beneficial relationship with Tijuana and on creating jobs on both
sides of the border.” Hmmmm, he sure doesn’t sound like a Republican.

Garcetti went on to say that “sanctuary
cities” aren’t even a real thing. There is no definition anywhere in any
charter or legislation. Los Angeles does not consider itself as a sanctuary
city, so we don’t know how a Trump administration will affect us yet, but we
don’t think we should lose any federal funding. We will push back against any
attempt to cut us off. “Pico Union isn’t filled with terrorists, it is filled
with hard working people.” The crowd went wild. My heart was aflutter.

Faulconer
admitted he opposed Trump and wrote in Paul Ryan for
president. He did back Trump on some policy issues though. “We would like to
partner with the new administration on infrastructure. We agree that
improvements are needed. We need better water infrastructure, to plan for
autonomous vehicles, etc. However, we will fight the administration on climate
change. We passed an aggressive climate change bill in San Diego, which focuses
primarily on water recycling. In CA, climate change means wildfires and
mudslides. It is a big deal to us and we will continue to fund programs to
combat it.”

Garcetti has reached out to president elect
Trump to try to arrange a meeting. “I want to let him know that values are
important and we will never compromise on that. I left him a message to tell
him I will call him out if he says something un-American, but otherwise, let’s
get to work!” Do you think he will fit in my bag? I want to take him home. No?
Ok, well at least I have never been so proud to be an Angeleno.

Asked if Trump’s presidency could affect
LA’s bid for the Olympics, Garcetti said, “Our diversity is our greatest
strength. Los Angeles is a reflection of the world. We have the people, and the
experience. So nothing should derail our bid.” (I mean, ladies, am I right?!)

Asked about Calexit, both mayors said it is
a bad idea. Garcetti answered, “I love this country and I want to make its
political winds blow from the west.” And with that, I officially dropped my
support of Calexit.

Next up was a panel of LA Times political
reporters. Their most interesting comment was that they were shocked by
people’s reactions to Trump all over the country. They witnessed first-hand the
power of celebrity and showmanship. People reacted to him like he was a rock
star. Women tried to touch him. They screamed and fainted. Everyone took
selfies. Even the men. Trump also resembled a stand up comedian. People were
laughing as much as they were cheering. He hooked them by entertaining them.
They felt that they already knew him because he was a universal TV celebrity,
so they were comfortable with him. They liked the way he spoke to them as much
as the things he said.

On top of that, the reporters said that
many men they talked to “voted with their middle finger.” They resent college
educated liberals, whom they thing look down on them. “So many people we talked
to, didn’t care whether Trump was qualified. They just wanted to stick it to
the liberals.”

Finally, it was time for the question and
answer session. We had to write our questions on cards, and pass them to the
front. I submitted 4. Bella submitted one.

One of my questions was read first: “Do you
see any of the electors refusing to cast votes for Trump?” The political
reporters said no. “I will never say never, but I don’t see this going
anywhere. There is no incentive for other states to do it.”

Bella’s question was read next, and the
moderator said the question was from a 13-year-old (we wrote that on the card.)
She asked “Why do you think so many women voted for Trump after he showed women
such disrespect?”

The LA Times political reporters said that
women, like every other group, are not one issue voters. No female candidate
ever gets 100% of her gender to vote for her. Women, all along, had negative
views about Hillary. They were willing to overlook things that Trump said
because Hillary was paid $250,000 a pop for giving speeches to Goldman Sachs,
and that turned them off more than Trump did. His female supporters were mostly
voting against her, instead of for him.

Bella was not at all satisfied with that
answer. As we walked out of the auditorium, several people stopped to ask her
if she was the famous 13-year-old (the crowd was mostly north of 50. Bella and
I were easily the youngest people in attendance). She said yes, and then talked
to strangers about how that answer didn’t sit well with her. “Women should
frown upon anyone who disrespects other women. Even if they didn’t like
Hillary, they could have still not voted for Trump. It’s possible to leave the
President part blank!”

I beamed with pride as I scanned the room
for mayor Garcetti, but he had already left. Oh well, all in all, it was well
worth cutting school to attend the event. We both learned a lot, and felt
motivated to write letters to reporters, call our congress people, and maybe
even run for office one day.

+++

Note by Patrick:

Great post, Leadfoot, many thanks!

Also, that's how children receive "real" education. I see a bright future ahead for Bella.

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Well, what is there to say during these trying times. Not much, really! Nothing is going to stop the upcoming disaster, and although Donald Trump apparently promised that he won't lead the USA into chaos straight away, but will keep a few pieces of civilization, there is not much hope. One could of course be cynical and could say "well, maybe it is good that America will finally see what right wing policies REALLY look like"....but then, too much damage will be done.

A good European comparison to Trump is actually Silvio Berlusconi, the former Italian Prime Minister, who also was a successful, boastful businessman, who liked the look of scantily dressed ladies, had strong ties to the mafia, was himself deeply corrupt - and finally left Italy in a terrible state. Pretty much a carbon copy of "the Don."

OK, well, that was probably a bit one-sided, this analysis, haha, but in general I can highly recommend this wonderful blog called "Medium" which really deserves a larger readership! :-)

The best movie? Well, there is no contest: Of course it has to be "Idiocracy"...!

This little movie from 2006, which Fox tried to bury back then, but which then became a "cult hit" on DVD, provides the perfect narrative for the upcoming Trump-presidency.

I had to think of this movie immediately when our dear friend Leadfoot commented on the previous post:

"The reason that people like my family in Ohio watch FOXNews is because it is packaged for less educated people. They like to feel entertained. They never watched Hillary speak because they literally cannot understand the words she is using. Her vocabulary makes them feel stupid and inferior, so they hate her."

Some of you might not have seen this movie yet. You can find quite a lot of clips on youtube, even the full movie (in bad quality, though), and here are some examples:

I would like to close by quoting yet another comment by Leadfoot on the previous post - because reality is always better than fiction:

"It is the same thing that has played out in my own family. I have one foot in L.A. and one foot in Ohio, where my family lives. They all voted for Trump because they are poor and stupid. But, and I have said this a million times here now, so sorry.... The economic frustration they feel is their own goddamn fault. They are LAZY. People were told 30 years ago that we were moving towards technology, and away from manufacturing. They were told to educate or re-educate themselves, and they chose not to. They chose not to leave their small towns for places where there are more opportunities. And they are PISSED OFF at those of us that did. I am sick of being told by my cousins I am a snobby bitch because I had the foresight to move away and did the hard work of getting 2 college degrees. They resent me because I became more than they did in life. And it is THEIR OWN FAULT. I am done. I will not even listen to willful ignorance and fake reality anymore.
Donald feels like the world frowns upon him, just like my family does. And they are right. That makes them angry. But they fail to take any personal responsibility. Idiots!"

The German chancellor is much braver than many people know. She also had no hesitation to sharply criticize Russian President Vladimir Putin in common press conferences, while he was standing next to her - in particular in regard to the Ukraine. Putin did not like this at all.

Imagine a common press conference with Merkel and Trump. This could get interesting in the future.

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Well, it is happened, the Americans have elected a vindictive racist narcissistic moron into the most important position in the world, with the power the blow the whole world up, and what could now possibly go wrong?

I am very angry, because I believe that many sides are to blame for this catastrophic result, and as I am not connected to any US party, I feel free to speak my mind.

This has been in the making for decades, and ever since the word "Liberal" became an insult in the eyes of many, the American democracy has been in great danger. Nobody knows this better than the Germans.

In Germany, we were once confronted with the fact that the minds of a large part of the population had been poisoned, and these people then also motivated a lot of other people to vote for an evil person. The results were catastrophic, as well all know.

The parallels to Nazi-Germany are too obvious. In Germany, it was the right-wing Hugenberg press-empire which made Adolf Hitler respectable, and in the USA, it was Fox News in particular as well as many right-wing radio shows all around the country which made extreme right-wing views respectable.

Yes, this election was manipulated, by Russian hackers, Wikileaks and Mr. Comey, but it is a huge failure of the political system as a whole that a flawed candidate like Donald Trump was possible in the first place.

Donald Trump cannot act within a democracy, because his twisted and sick mind does not allow it. He can only function as a dictator. If he does not become the "American Putin", I will eat my hat.

Moderate Republicans should have stopped Trump, but they were far too self-absorbed and could not commit to one strong candidate to run against Trump. Then, the #NeverTrump people could not bring themselves to vote for Hillary and wasted their votes as a result.

The Democrats obviously lost their connection to a large part of their traditional base, which is terrible.

Not enough was also done against the destruction of the middle class - now many of them turned to an extremist.

I am also very upset that Barack Obama continued to expand the surveillance state, with the naive belief that this monstrous surveillance machine would only be used for justified actions. It should have been more than obvious that this machine can also be abused, and I am pretty certain that Donald Trump's domestic enemies will get "first impressions" of this fact pretty soon. With the available surveillance technology, virtually everybody is an open book, as all communications can be easily monitored, and real privacy has become virtually impossible. Good luck with that.

This might not be a popular view, but I really don't care, sorry: It was a huge mistake in my opinon to construct and expand this huge surveillance machine. It will soon be in the hands of Donald Trump and his ruthless extreme right-wing allies. They surely will put it to "good use."

What else is there to say? There really is little hope. It will not be bad, it will be worse. Many Americans will suffer, and probably many people abroad as well. History tells us that people like Donald Trump are hell-bent to start wars, and I do not believe that Trump will be the exception.

Democracy in the USA will soon become a travesty. This is inevitable. The most important features, like the free media and free speech, will be under real threat, no doubt about it,

The media failed as well, as we have often discussed in the comments. They can now become his claqueurs, because much more won't be possible any more.

The larger the mob, the harder the test. In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

- We learned that most of the GOP politicans are disgusting cowards who would endorse satan if their political lives depended on it

- We learned that right-wingers like Ben Howe are actually able to realize that somebody like Trump would rule as a dictator and are not afraid to speak out against him (however, they will start to love other right-wing scumbags again pretty soon, sadly)

- We learned that democracy is very fragile, and that even after this election democracy in the USA will continue to be under threat

- We learned that politics in the USA is not a joke, but deadly serious, especially if you elect the person who will be able to blow up the world

We learned of course many, many more things - maybe you can add more examples in the comments.

It will be an exciting day! Let's praise democracy and enjoy ourselves!

We are standing on the brink of the abyss. And, like anyone who’s ever peered into a chasm, we are experiencing a queasy, sinking feeling. All round the world, not just in the United States, people are contemplating the prospect that on Wednesday morning we will wake to hear of victory for Donald J Trump.

Trump campaign hit with restraining order over voter intimidation fears – as it happened
Follow live updates from the 2016 campaign trail as Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are dispatched to swing states with four days to go until election day
Read more
The mere imagining of that outcome is inducing anxiety in those far away from the action. I don’t just mean obsessives such as me, who spend the midnight hour checking the early voting returns from Washoe County, Nevada. Otherwise normal people also confess to being reduced to nervous wrecks by the thought that Trump might actually win. They chart their mood swings on social media, delighting in hopeful news – Hillary Clinton up in ABC News tracking poll! – or panicking at any sign the snake-oil salesman might pull it off, such as today’s Washington Post headline: “Donald Trump has never been closer to the presidency than he is at this moment”, I could feel my palms turn clammy.

In Britain we feel especially vulnerable. If you voted remain, the memory of a ballot going the wrong way is fresh. And not just any ballot, but one you believe will cause lasting, epochal damage. The thought that Tuesday might bring the second such moment in a year is one to dread.

Thanks to Brexit, the usual reassurances – the expert endorsements, the polling data – have lost their calming properties. In June the smart money, including the betting markets, said remain had it in the bag. Burnt by that experience, nothing can soothe us now – except the right result. Until then, we have to chew our fingernails, hit refresh on the Real Clear Politics polling page and wait.

Many, especially in the US, will have a ready response: what’s it got to do with you? To which the answer is: plenty. The experience of the last photo-finish election – Bush v Gore in 2000 – taught many non-Americans a lesson we could not forget. Americans decide, but their decision affects the entire world. The supreme court’s installation of George W Bush as president had a profound and global impact. Just over a year later, Bush was agitating to invade Iraq, a choice whose consequences we live with still. (In Britain the focus is always on Tony Blair, as it was again this week when John Chilcot faced MPs. But that war would never have happened without Bush.)
(...)It's the contempt Trump shows for democratic norms that has people fearing they are witness to something akin to fascism
So a President Trump will change lives far beyond the US. An American leader who believes climate change is a Chinese hoax, who believes terror suspects should be tortured and their family members killed, who believes that Saudi Arabia should have nuclear weapons, who is fascinated by nukes’ power of “devastation” and who has asked repeatedly why the US doesn’t use them; a man who says, “I love war”; a man who drools in admiration for Vladimir Putin and whose disregard for Nato, and refusal to promise to defend a member state if attacked, would all but invite Moscow to invade one of the Baltic states – such a man would plunge all of us into a dark future. That we are not living in the US will not protect us.o a Trump presidency would exert a pull beyond America’s shores. Suspicion of migrants, loathing of Muslims, a desire to put up walls and roll back social progress – these currents exist everywhere. Were Trump to win, they would have the endorsement of the most powerful office in the world. For eight years, Barack Obama has been a cautionary voice, counselling against the global rush towards xenophobia and insularity. If Trump replaces him, white nationalism will have command of the world’s loudest megaphone. Racists and bigots everywhere will feel validated, vindicated – and mobilised.

The same is true of the contempt Trump shows for basic democratic norms. As much as the rank prejudice, it’s this that has serious people – including Republicans – fearing they are witness to something akin to fascism. His insistence that “I alone can fix” America’s problems; his threats to curb the free press, punishing news organisations that have criticised him; his hint that he would sack America’s generals and replace them with ones more compliant; his threats to jail his opponent and his winking hint that gun rights activists could find a way to deal with Clinton; his refusal to say he will accept the outcome of the election – with each of these steps, Trump has trampled on the foundation stones of liberal democracy.

Should he win, it would be a victory for a candidate who has lied more than any in history, who is spectacularly unqualified for the job and who stands contrary to the very idea of expertise. (Asked who he consulted on foreign policy, Trump answered, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.”) It would be a triumph over truth, facts and knowledge. It would be the start of a new age of endarkenment.

Well, at least nobody can say that this election is boring. ;-)

In any case, we still have a lot of hope that sanity will prevail in the end. That being said, the American political system is an absolute nightmare.

What matters to us is the truth

"The chief thing is to have a soul that loves the truth and harbors it where it finds it. And another thing: the truth requires constant repetition, because error is being preached about us all the time, and not only by isolated individuals but by the masses. In newspapers and encyclopedias, in schools and universities, everywhere error rides high and basks in the consciousness of having the majority on its side."-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in a letter to Johann Peter Eckermann, December 16, 1828

Sensational revelations in the "Trig emails" about Sarah Palin's pregnancy

POST 1 - CLICK TO READ: Lisa Demer, journalist at the Anchorage Daily News, asked all the right questions about Sarah Palin's pregnancy with Trig, and asked directly for Trig's birth certificate - but was met by stonewalling and insults from Palin's staffPOST 2 - CLICK TO READ: More discoveries in Sarah Palin's released emails: Palin's team wanted to launch "pre-emptive strike" against ADN-story about Palin's pregnancy, was shocked that Lisa Demer tried to put together a "timeline" of Bristol's pregnancies and contacted schools and hospitals

POST 3 - CLICK TO READ: Newly released email suggests that five weeks after Trig's official birth, Sarah Palin didn't have a birth certificate for Trig

- UPDATE: Palin's spokesperson wants to "cut the ADN off" if they continue to ask questions about Trig's birth

- UPDATE 2: ADN-editor Pat Dougherty to Bill McAllister: "The judgment of your office to go after the Daily News on this Trig stuff would constitute malpractice"

Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy

Download all posts by Politicalgates about the faked pregnancy as PDF-document HERE.

Palin-biographer Joe McGinniss: "I think the Politicalgates archives are the best single available resource for anyone wondering why questions are still being asked about Sarah really being Trig’s birth mother." (from August 28, 2011)

We break the "Spiral of Silence" - Read the details about the "biggest hoax in American political history!"

Commentary at "The Guardian"

Commentary at "The Guardian" (UK) from April 28, 2011, written by Kathleen Baker, editor of Politicalgates, about Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy: "Sarah Palin, unreliable narrator"

How she got away with it

How Sarah Palin finally got away with the Trig pregnancy hoax, despite a mountain of evidence: Read this overview

Download Sarah Palin Trig pregnancy research paper

Download the research paper regarding Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy and the role of the media, written by Brad Scharlott, Associate Professor for Journalism at Northern Kentucky University - CLICK HERE.

Disclaimer

Although Politicalgates may from time to time monitor or review discussions, chats, postings and the like on this site, Politicalgates is under no obligation to do so and assumes no responsibility or liability arising from the content of any such locations nor for any error, defamation, libel, slander, omission, falsehood, obscenity, pornography, profanity, danger, or inaccuracy contained in any information within such locations on this site. Politicalgates assumes no responsibility or liability for any actions or communications by you or any unrelated third party within or outside of this site. Our site contains links to third-party websites. We have no influence whatsoever on the information on these websites and accept no guarantee for its correctness. The content of such third-party websites is the responsibility of the respective owners/providers. Politicalgates bears no responsibility for comments. All contributors at Politicalgates are individually responsible for their posts, and all contributors express their individual opinions in their posts. Politicalgates is a blog with an educational, non-commercial purpose.